Reasonable Force

[Alecto]

Should it be allowed for a homeowner to be legally prosecuted for using excessive force against an intruder?

Example: Several years ago a man was prosecuted (and aquitted) for murder after he shot an intruder. The man fired 12 times and the prosecution argued two things. First, that 12 was too much. And second that since 2 of the shots had struck the intruder's chest and 6 hit his back (The other four presumeably missed) that the intruder was trying to run away and the homeowner should have let him go.

I say no. If its 3 am and Im half awake and your crawling through my broken front window and Im packing iron, Im gonna squeeze that trigger untill Im empty. I dont know what your there for, especially if my wife and child are in the house. I dont want to gamble that you might have a gun and kill me and my family. I have no way to know if your going to tuck tail and run or draw a gun and fire at me if I try to confront you with the gun.

 

[vipertaja]

Should it be allowed for a homeowner to be legally prosecuted for using excessive force against an intruder?

Example: Several years ago a man was prosecuted (and aquitted) for murder after he shot an intruder. The man fired 12 times and the prosecution argued two things. First, that 12 was too much. And second that since 2 of the shots had struck the intruder's chest and 6 hit his back (The other four presumeably missed) that the intruder was trying to run away and the homeowner should have let him go.

I say no. If its 3 am and Im half awake and your crawling through my broken front window and Im packing iron, Im gonna squeeze that trigger untill Im empty. I dont know what your there for, especially if my wife and child are in the house. I dont want to gamble that you might have a gun and kill me and my family. I have no way to know if your going to tuck tail and run or draw a gun and fire at me if I try to confront you with the gun.

This is a complicated issue...but I agree on your justification. In some case
like that I could imagine doing the same, heart racing with adrenaline and
fear for my loved one's life.

However I do think there are cases where it should be prosecuted...
where the intruder is killed though clearly incapacitated or if he was made
to suffer for it.

 

[Alecto]

In cases of obvious torture....ok I have to agree.

I think itd be hard to get a case of incapacitation. People tend to be less careful when theyre scared and tired. I know if I was standing there with 50 bullets, Im gonna fire 50 bullets and if that person is still twitching, Im gonna reload. Why take the chance that he's pulling a gun out?

 

[vipertaja]

In cases of obvious torture....ok I have to agree.

I think itd be hard to get a case of incapacitation. People tend to be less careful when theyre scared and tired. I know if I was standing there with 50 bullets, Im gonna fire 50 bullets and if that person is still twitching, Im gonna reload. Why take the chance that he's pulling a gun out?

Yes...I was mostly referring to someone like a trained soldier with lack of
remorse and maybe a few wires loose. Someone who is in control of the
situation and takes a slow "limb by limb" way to eventually kill someone.
There are a lot of twisted people like that.

 

[DaRkWoLf]

I do not think that criminals should have any rights if they are interdicted while the crime was in progress.

In todays world if one does let em live, they sue.

 

[vipertaja]

I do not think that criminals should have any rights if they are interdicted while the crime was in progress.

In todays world if one does let em live, they sue.

What if it isn't a criminal? what if he is persecuted and needs help or is
wounded...or maybe he seeks cover from nasty weather. Will you take time
to find that out? And mere theft for drug money isn't particularly heinous
either. If you shoot you better shoot as a reaction assuming to save
someones life and not because his presence irritatingly woke you up and it
took a few minutes to find your gun.

 

[Alecto]

What if it isn't a criminal? what if he is persecuted and needs help or is
wounded...or maybe he seeks cover from nasty weather. Will you take time
to find that out? And mere theft for drug money isn't particularly heinous
either. If you shoot you better shoot as a reaction assuming to save
someones life and not because his presence irritatingly woke you up and it
took a few minutes to find your gun.

It could be that, or it could be someone comming in to cause you harm. The point is that Im not willing to take that risk

 

[vipertaja]

It could be that, or it could be someone comming in to cause you harm. The point is that Im not willing to take that risk

Did you read the entire post? I said that it'd better be because you think you're saving an innocent life. If you have no time to consider it then you don't and you act on instinct. I did not contradict you there.

 

[Alecto]

Did you read the entire post? I said that it'd better be because you think you're saving an innocent life. If you have no time to consider it then you don't and you act on instinct. I did not contradict you there.

Sorry, Im gettin tired, my bad

 

[DaRkWoLf]

What if it isn't a criminal? what if he is persecuted and needs help or is
wounded...or maybe he seeks cover from nasty weather. Will you take time
to find that out? And mere theft for drug money isn't particularly heinous
either. If you shoot you better shoot as a reaction assuming to save
someones life and not because his presence irritatingly woke you up and it
took a few minutes to find your gun.

Thats the entire purpose of identifying the target. I couldnt imagine simply shooting someone without ID ing, it goes against my practice and technique. Breaking into my house for theft of anything will get a nasty reaction of lead. If some one tries and takes my stuff on the street, since Im not old enough to carry Ill either engage the criminal in unarmed hand to hand or use a knife (I almost always have a leatherman and a LED light), if he has a gun Ill attempt to exploit a weakness (more than likely impossible to safely exploit, so I probably wouldnt) or Ill simply adapt to the situation; it goes against my nature to "give in" no matter how stupid it is.

As for the last sentence,I suppose your referencing my other post. I had reason to believe that the target was malicious as he was not a neighbor, not a cop, and not a friend of mine nor the familly, had a set of lock picking tools (what a moron, that wont be too effective on two deadbolts), and was wearing black. I was armed instantly, there was no "finding a gun". In hindsight, I was only mad I couldnt find the sabot slugs, as the slug barrel dosent pattern buckshot with much consistency or positive effect. This was not a consuming process, sights were on target for the majority of the time. Hes intruding on my (or I should say my moms) property and for all i know, he may have been armed. He wouldnt have had time to use a weapon, and I prefer it that way.

 

[vipertaja]

Thats the entire purpose of identifying the target. I couldnt imagine simply shooting someone without ID ing, it goes against my practice and technique. Breaking into my house for theft of anything will get a nasty reaction of lead. If some one tries and takes my stuff on the street, since Im not old enough to carry Ill either engage the criminal in unarmed hand to hand or use a knife (I almost always have a leatherman and a LED light), if he has a gun Ill attempt to exploit a weakness (more than likely impossible to safely exploit, so I probably wouldnt) or Ill simply adapt to the situation; it goes against my nature to "give in" no matter how stupid it is.

As for the last sentence,I suppose your referencing my other post. I had reason to believe that the target was malicious as he was not a neighbor, not a cop, and not a friend of mine nor the familly, had a set of lock picking tools (what a moron, that wont be too effective on two deadbolts), and was wearing black. I was armed instantly, there was no "finding a gun". In hindsight, I was only mad I couldnt find the sabot slugs, as the slug barrel dosent pattern buckshot with much consistency or positive effect. This was not a consuming process, sights were on target for the majority of the time. Hes intruding on my (or I should say my moms) property and for all i know, he may have been armed. He wouldnt have had time to use a weapon, and I prefer it that way.

That is good. The last sentence wasn't really refering to anything...just a
pointer for the more triggerhappy kind. You know when the guy is almost
through explaining to your wife how he's been hunted by a gang and the
husband crashes in and nails the guy for his trouble.

I can see you're not that kind of a person though.

 

[Lokisdottir]

I do not think that criminals should have any rights if they are interdicted while the crime was in progress.

In todays world if one does let em live, they sue.

Oh, too true! Never simply hurt someone who breaks into your house. If you must shoot, always shoot to kill. If they live, they will sue you... and probably win.

Hel, in this sue-happy society, I can imagine a criminal suing a family because somebody brandished a gun at him and made him feel "threatened," even though no shots were fired. Don't laugh. Stranger things are happening all the time. Remember the old woman who sued two little girls because they baked cookies for her and left them on her doorstep? She felt threatened because she thought somebody was trying to break in, and sued them for the 'mental anguish' they caused.

Er, heh, now I'm getting a bit ranty. This sort of thing is a pet peeve of mine.

 

[z3ro]

If some one tries and takes my stuff on the street, since Im not old enough to carry Ill either engage the criminal in unarmed hand to hand or use a knife (I almost always have a leatherman and a LED light), if he has a gun Ill attempt to exploit a weakness (more than likely impossible to safely exploit, so I probably wouldnt) or Ill simply adapt to the situation; it goes against my nature to "give in" no matter how stupid it is.

Trust me(I know you don't want to, but please do), no amount of stuff is worth risking your life for. Someone comes up on the street(especially with a gun) give em your wallet. It's not worth being injured or dying for. Because no matter how good you are, there's always someone better, and if I'm a crook and mugging someone, I just wanna get outta there. But if the kid fights back, I might have to hurt him. Trust me, it's not worth it.

 

[Spinrad]

I don't know, but I remember what a guy who had commited a few crimes told me once: if you think someone is packing, kill everyone fist thing.

 

[vipertaja]

I don't know, but I remember what a guy who had commited a few crimes told me once: if you think someone is packing, kill everyone fist thing.

Sounds like a plan...say, what's that in your pocket?

*goes on to kill everyone on christianforums*

 

[Spinrad]

It's funny how people don't think things through. Luckily the bad guys are as stupid as the good guys or the whole planet would be under marshal law.

 

[Seeking...]

If you break into my house, excessive force is neccesary.

Criminals have been known to repeatedly break into the same house if the stuff was nice enough and the break in went smooth enough.

As a single women living alone - I want all the criminals to know I am not an easy target. If I kill an intruder - I think they will get the message.

P.S. - as for the poster who said, just let them take your stuff... I don't believe in acquiencing to criminials because once they have you in a submissive position - they might change their mind about what it is they want to take - and while I don't care about my wallet, I do care about my body. The criminals in my family taught me that.

 

[z3ro]

P.S. - as for the poster who said, just let them take your stuff... I don't believe in acquiencing to criminials because once they have you in a submissive position - they might change their mind about what it is they want to take - and while I don't care about my wallet, I do care about my body. The criminals in my family taught me that.

But they may just want your wallet. And if you fight back, I guarantee that the chance of them hurting you goes up enormously. Especially if they are brandishing some sort of weapon. Fight back against the guy with the gun, and he'll certainly put a bullet in you. Me, with all my fighting experience and training, even armed, if I was faced with attacker, I'd throw my wallet on the ground and run. The highest probability of getting home alive to my family.

 

[Alecto]

If you break into my house, excessive force is neccesary.

Criminals have been known to repeatedly break into the same house if the stuff was nice enough and the break in went smooth enough.

As a single women living alone - I want all the criminals to know I am not an easy target. If I kill an intruder - I think they will get the message.

P.S. - as for the poster who said, just let them take your stuff... I don't believe in acquiencing to criminials because once they have you in a submissive position - they might change their mind about what it is they want to take - and while I don't care about my wallet, I do care about my body. The criminals in my family taught me that.

Agreed. If your a woman at home, especially alone, shoot first, ask questions later.

 

[Seeking...]

But they may just want your wallet. And if you fight back, I guarantee that the chance of them hurting you goes up enormously. Especially if they are brandishing some sort of weapon. Fight back against the guy with the gun, and he'll certainly put a bullet in you. Me, with all my fighting experience and training, even armed, if I was faced with attacker, I'd throw my wallet on the ground and run. The highest probability of getting home alive to my family.

I'd give him my wallet, but I would not get into a submissive position, i.e. - lay on the ground with your hands behind your head. This goes for a potential mugging on the street. In my house, I am fighting every step of the way, weapon or no.